The Instigator
apaches
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
9spaceking
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

Is it possible to make a triangel with three right angels?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
9spaceking
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/15/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 946 times Debate No: 52576
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (5)
Votes (4)

 

apaches

Pro

First day is for accepting, second is for proving.
9spaceking

Con

I accept the challenge.
I define triangle as "a closed plane figure having three sides and three angles." http://dictionary.reference.com...
And "Right angles" as angles with the measure of 90 degrees.
Onto you pro.
Debate Round No. 1
apaches

Pro

A triangle would be defined as a shape with three sides. so why not a three right angels. To do this just place a triangle on a sphere. http://www.math.cornell.edu...
9spaceking

Con

Three STRAIGHT sides, to be more accurate. A sphere has no straight sides, all sides are curved, so that is not a triangle. Furthermore, in a triangle, all the (interior) angles always add up to 180. Always. Because this "triangle's" interior angles add up to 270, it in no way can be a triangle by the proven properties of a triangle. Source: http://www.mathsisfun.com...
Vote con.

Debate Round No. 2
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Diqiucun_Cunmin 3 years ago
Diqiucun_Cunmin
This reminds me of the one time. My discipline mistress, who loves to tell stories and talk about maths when she disciplines us, asked all the students in our form, 'what is the angle sum of triangles?'

Nobody volunteered, so she picked a boy in the first row to come up to the stage. '180 degrees,' he answered.

She smiled. 'No. In plane geometry, triangles' angles add up to 180 degrees. However, if your triangle is drawn on the sphere, the angles would be completely different.'

The moral of the story? 'Don't assume everything will be all right'.
Posted by RossM 3 years ago
RossM
It is possible to create a triangle with 3 right angles. On a normal plane it is impossible, but in spherical geometry it isn't. Do your research people!
Posted by Zerrok 3 years ago
Zerrok
yes you can make a triangle with three right angles. you take a ruler (that has 90 degree corners) and use three of the four corners to make the triangle: win. The definitions need to be a bit more clear. :)
Posted by E_Pluribus_Unum 3 years ago
E_Pluribus_Unum
The ambiguity of the parameters seems to limit this debate. Effectively communicated your definitions, ideas, and boundaries of what is being discussed is essential to any truly stimulating discussion.

Here is my input: you are both correct, in a way. The Contender is using Euclidean geometry in a Euclidean plane, which is the most commonly used form of mathematics in this regard. However, there are alternatives. There is, for example, the existence of hyperbolic planes or spheres in hyperbolic and spherical geometry respectively. In both of these forms of geometry, a triangle can be made that is over 180 degrees.
Posted by AthenaMusic10 3 years ago
AthenaMusic10
I know why. because in order for a shape to be a triangle, not only does it have to be a closed figure with 3 vertices, it's angles must also equal 180 degrees. If you were to have 3 right angles with 90 degrees each, it would equal 270 degrees, thus not making it a triangle. This is simple geometry. So the answer is no, you cannot make a triangle with 3 right angles.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by The_Scapegoat_bleats 3 years ago
The_Scapegoat_bleats
apaches9spacekingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Arguments are tied, because Con changed the parameters of his own definition post-hoc. Both are right, but they are talking about different situations. All that is left is S&G, and that goes to Con.
Vote Placed by AthenaMusic10 3 years ago
AthenaMusic10
apaches9spacekingTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: refer to my comment in the comment's section below v v v v
Vote Placed by demonlord343 3 years ago
demonlord343
apaches9spacekingTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: I am not sure if this is some weird devil's advocate thing for math, but I am pretty sure that Con is correct..
Vote Placed by Sargon 3 years ago
Sargon
apaches9spacekingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con showed that a triangle, by the definition of a triangle, cannot have three right angles, as this violates the angle sum theorem. This negates the resolution. Easy Con win.